A recent benefit of computer
technology is the ability for a police officer to transmit a record of an
individual’s fingerprint impressions from the field and receive confirmation
of identity in the amount of time a routine detention takes. Devices such as
the Integrated Biometric Identification System (IBIS) or Remote Data Terminal
(RDT) make it possible to catch wanted persons while they are stopped,
regardless of the name or identification they provide.

Background

In California, within the last few
years, automated fingerprint systems managed by Cal-I.D. began appearing at
different Sheriff’s Offices. These Cal-I.D. bureaus worked with local police
agencies and jails, taking over local recording of booking fingerprints before
print records were sent on to the California Department of Justice and the
Federal Bureau of investigation. Many success stories emerged as CAL-I.D.
began to identify wanted persons and other using a false identity while the
person was still in jail. Once CAL-I.D. was established in various counties,
an officer could mail or fax in inked fingerprints for an inquiry. CAL-I.D.
expanded their operation adding a unit to run checks on latent fingerprints
discovered at crime scenes, comparing them to booking fingerprints in the data
base. In San Bernardino-Riverside (California) Counties, a regional CAL-I.D.
program was established, providing ‘local’ hits from either county.

CAL-I.D. Goes Wireless

As technology progressed and wireless
Internet became available, combination state and county grants provided for
the purchasing of devices that capture fingerprints electronically, in the
field. These portable devices, weighing less than one pound, consist of a
camera lens, optical capacitance scanning pad, and IBIS-enabled PDA. They are
made available to local agencies at no cost. “The IBIS allows for an
automated fingerprint identification system search of local data bases and if
there is no match, a pilot project with the California Department of Justice
allows for a search of their 19-plus million persons record data base. A
typical hit will occur within five minutes (locally) and six to eight minutes
(DOJ)” (M. Pliss, personal communication, April 15,
2009).

Impact of IBIS

Matthew Pliss, Field Services Engineer
for San Bernardino County for twelve years, reports “quite a few” IBIS success
stories in the last five years. Individuals with no bail warrants are
routinely identified and the coroner can often make a quick on-scene
identification of a deceased individual by scanning their thumb print. “In
one case, a Victorville Deputy brought out an IBIS. The wanted gang member
he’d stopped just gave up, recognizing that his fingerprints would be
checked.” (M. Pliss, personal communication, April 15, 2009). In 2008, over
eleven thousand fingerprint searches were conducted using devices issued to
agencies in San Bernardino County, California. Just under 3,400 of the checks
were identification ‘hits’ revealing 700 of the people checked had lied about
their identity (Harper, 2009).

Non-Technology Alternatives

The capability IBIS and RDT devices
can be duplicated, but not in the field. In order to perform the functions
this device does, an officer would have to take inked impressions of an
individual fingerprint(s) and either mail or deliver them to a fingerprint
bureau for an identification check. There is no practical non-technology
alternative.

Stakeholders

Besides law enforcement agencies,
every branch of the criminal justice system and every citizen is a potential
stakeholder in this technology. Identification of wanted criminals using
false identifications to avoid capture has the obvious result of the
individual being in jail instead of in the public to commit new crimes.
Congressman Jerry Lewis, who secured almost two million dollars in Justice
Department funding to complete the San Bernardino- Riverside regional CAL-I.D.
program points to one of the successes: The arrest of an individual with “….
$2.6 million of warrants out for his arrest on charges of child molestation.”
(Inland Empire News, 2009).

Although California agencies are
leading the nation in implementing this technology, other states will benefit
from this experience. Instead of individual programs being started on a
county level, once California systems are running smoothly, other states will
have the opportunity to analyze which systems work best and implement a single
IBIS-type program at a state level.

Cost

IBIS devices used in San Bernardino
County run about $3,500 and BlueCheck handhelds used by LAPD are $700 each.
The cost to integrating cellular transmission of fingerprints into a law
enforcement agency data base varies depending on that agency’s current
hardware and software setup. Federal grants such as the San
Bernardino-Riverside grant obtained by Congressman Lewis are likely required
as set-up can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Outcomes and Consequences

Success of the IBIS technology is
spreading. In September, 2008, the San Bernardino Sun Newspaper reported that
the Los Angeles Police Department, using a technology called BlueCheck,
distributed 200 ‘IBIS-type’ devices to officers, with another 1,000 devices
due in February, 2009. Although the Los Angeles system is limited to
county-only fingerprint checks, successful apprehensions are being reported,
like in San Bernardino County. LAPD officials report reviews such as “It’s
and instant lie detector test” and, “Everybody wants them….(we) couldn’t keep
them all on the shelf if (we) had them” (Lowrey, 2008).

One consequence of the technology is
the American Civil Liberties Union involvement with the following question:
“What if this technology is used to collect and record fingerprints instead of
just check them? Would the new technology encourage officers to embark on
random, fingerprint-collecting expeditions?” (Lowrey, 2008). Like with any
other technologies, this at least serves as a reminder that there is a proper
way to use the device.

Researching the cost differences of
devices used in San Bernardino-Riverside Counties and those used by LAPD
revealed a potential unintended consequence of this technology. According to
another technician familiar with Integrated Biometric Identification Systems,
the BlueCheck device has a functionality issue. While the hardware is smaller
in size and easier to use, software embedded in the BlueCheck does not
digitally verify a fingerprint it reproduces. In other words, potential
validity of a digital impression taken by a BlueCheck device can be challenged
by an attorney knowledgeable about electronic technology verification (source
information verified by instructor, personal communication, April 21, 2009).
Adverse consequences could range from a motion to suppress evidence to
challenging an officer’s probable cause to arrest. Also, the necessity of
re-fingerprint a suspect could be required, causing future identification
issues for individuals released in the field. Officers using BlueCheck
devices may be unaware of this lacking feature or the potential implications
of a non-verified digital image such as the need to collect further evidence
of deception before making an arrest.

Conclusion

Portable fingerprint readers are the
latest in technology devices joining license plate scanners as a way for field
officers to catch criminals and combat deception. The results are more bad
guys being captured and assuming that a few suspects are responsible for many
crimes, a lower crime rate. Although fingerprint scanning technology will
only expand, the current challenge is interoperability, or integrating all
data bases, local through federal, into what is being checked on a detention
in the field. Research suggests that the need for a device that digitally
verifies impressions is a necessity.

ABOUT THE
AUTHOR

Corporal William
McCombs, (from a mid size police department in South California), is a traffic investigator with over 30 years
of service. He is a Radar/Lidar Instructor, Bosch Crash Data Retrieval
Technician Instructor with training in Sokkia total station-CadZone forensic
diagramming, and Vericom accelerometer computer. He completed this paper as
part of the requirements for coursework in his BS in Criminal Justice
Management at the Union Institute and University.